Why we avoid conflicts of interest

[Adam]

And for the record, I hate the idea of doing it "for the tape," as if your assigner won't trust your word but needs the tape to back you up.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

And for the record, I hate the idea of doing it "for the tape," as if your assigner won't trust your word but needs the tape to back you up.

I like the stop sign and we use it my area of Georgia. Maybe that's why I like it because I've been instructed to use it. It does work, but that depends on your definition of "work". If you believe it should prevent a T, that's not what it is there for. The purpose is to let not only the coach, but everyone else, including your partners, that the coach has been warned. Yes, it will show up on the tape and I like that. It's not about your assignor not trusting you. But the coach may very well say..."I was never warned". Well, you now have proof to show him that he was. Not to prove it to your assignor but to refute what the coach just said. Someone else said that he warns the coach without the stop sign verbally so just he and the coach knows about it. I think that's a bad idea. Warn him/her so that everyone knows you did. You're not showing him up. Your just taking care of business. Sure you can warn the coach and then at a dead ball tell your partners you've warned the coach. However, I believe it is much more efficient if you pre-game the stop sign and say that once it has been given by one it has been given by all. The next time the coach is out of line, it's T time.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

And for the record, I hate the idea of doing it "for the tape," as if your assigner won't trust your word but needs the tape to back you up.

"The tape" isn't for your assignor to believe you, it's for your assignor to use as evidence that you handled things properly when defending you or your actions to the coach, AD, or conference commissioner.

Coaches also have their version of what transpired in a particular situation and they expect their ADs to trust their word as much as we expect our assignors to trust ours.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

"The tape" isn't for your assignor to believe you, it's for your assignor to use as evidence that you handled things properly when defending you or your actions to the coach, AD, or conference commissioner.

Coaches also have their version of what transpired in a particular situation and they expect their ADs to trust their word as much as we expect our assignors to trust ours.

Fair enough, and I'd be more inclined to go along if a warning was required. Virtually every assigner I've had would respond very quickly to the "he didn't give me a warning" defense: "He's not required to."

And if the coach is inclined to lie about it, he's just as inclined to swear at you quietly and then deny it anyway.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Fair enough, and I'd be more inclined to go along if a warning was required. Virtually every assigner I've had would respond very quickly to the "he didn't give me a warning" defense: "He's not required to."

And if the coach is inclined to lie about it, he's just as inclined to swear at you quietly and then deny it anyway.

True about warnings. My statement was more in general about "the tape". Even though I do have at least one supervisor who prefers we give a warning when possible.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

True about warnings. My statement was more in general about "the tape". Even though I do have at least one supervisor who prefers we give a warning when possible.

I really don't mind giving warnings, but I prefer doing it quietly if possible. Odds are better that the behavior will stop without a T that way. OTOH, I do understand your point about the tape, I hadn't really thought about it in terms of the battle between the assigner/supervisor and the AD.

I disagree that a public warning isn't showing up a coach. I think sometimes it needs to be done that way, and sometimes it doesn't. The fact is come coaches need to be shown up, and that's what they're doing to us anyway so I'm not all that sympathetic in those situations.

But when we're doing the post-mortem and figuring out how we might have walked a coach away from the ledge, I think it's worth considering whether a public reprimand (stop sign or loud warning that the Sunday School teacher in the concession stand can hear clearly) might have inflamed things. Like all "tools," it won't work in all situations. Maybe my problem is I haven't used the stop-sign in the right situations (except once when I used it with a player who was whining.)